Predictive modeling will be nearly automated (except in cases where manual feature engineering helps).
Data science will focus more attention on solution finding, data gathering, cleaning, ETL, and business.
72 karma · joined January 8, 2019
Data science will focus more attention on solution finding, data gathering, cleaning, ETL, and business.
Depending on how susceptible you are to such psychological tricks (and cashback is also a trick to make you spend more or hook you to the brand -- it is only offered because it is EV profitable to the bank), your advice may be neutralized or net negative for a large part of the population that lacks your strong self-discipline. One late fee and you wipe out all your profits (and your credit score).
Smart and risk-free to only spend what you've got ("pay as you go"), besides you help avoid a national credit crunch.
> Debt robs a man of his self-respect, and makes him almost despise himself. Grunting and groaning and working for what he has eaten up or worn out, and now when he is called upon to pay up, he has nothing to show for his money; this is properly termed “working for a dead horse.”
> It is all very well to say, “I have got trusted for sixty days, and if I don't have the money the creditor will think nothing about it.” There is no class of people in the world, who have such good memories as creditors. When the sixty days run out, you will have to pay. If you do not pay, you will break your promise, and probably resort to a falsehood. You may make some excuse or get in debt elsewhere to pay it, but that only involves you the deeper.
> (1) Soviet research is much more oriented toward biological and physical investigation of paranormal phenomena than is U.S. research, which is dominated by psychologists;
> (2) although visible U.S. and Soviet level of effort appear roughly equal, over forty years of research in the United States have failed to significantly advance our understanding of paranormal phenomena;
> (3) if paranormal phenomena exist, the thrust of Soviet research papers appears more likely to lead to explanation, control and application than is U.S. research;
The paranormal arms race between East and the West may have started with a 1960 French article describing how experiments at Duke University had established telepathic communication with nuclear submarines using Zener cards. The success rate was stated at 75%. The Navy later stated the story was a hoax, but it was likely deliberately planted by Western intelligence agencies to detract from real technological advances in communicating with submarines (such as Very Low Frequency Radio). But the Russians seemed to take the bait, wasting resources, yet later started reporting successes and publishing a wide range of high quality research (of which the CIA became aware). [1]
This in turn scared the USA into keeping up. Meanwhile the Russians promoted their own hoaxes and disinformation, such as Nina Kulagina, who was seemingly capable of telekinesis.
By the way, hypnosis and mass hypnosis are not woo woo, but legit toolsets of the intelligence agencies. Even the Stargate project had its use as a creative tool for scenario development and intuitive thinking. Interesting to note that its participants Harold Puthoff, Edwin May, Ingo Swann, and Pat Price were all involved with Scientology. Even the government may at one time been interested in the supposed powers of the OTO's.
> As scientists we should not be pre-disposed to shutdown things we do not understand without putting said phenomena through a testing phase.
Which is why Dr. Estabrooks (who the Russians knew was funded a big budget by US military to conduct research into the paranormal) wanted to know for sure if it was possible to hypnotize someone into committing murder and forget it ever happened. As real scientists such a test would be quickly shut down on moral grounds, so perhaps it is better to speak of military research when discussing this woo woo.
Given how disinformation and wasting the academic resources of foreign enemies ("eating carrots makes British pilots see at night", or the suggestion to drop the bandit problem over occupied France) is such a common trick, I wonder what current tricks are in use. I suspect that any country which focuses a lot of attention on fairness in AI will be at a disadvantage over a country that does not seem to care about this and just keeps automating no matter privacy or discrimination costs.
[1] https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/files/SovParap...
2.) Here you conflate "intelligence" with biological power structures (energy resources, territorial plotting). That is like asking where aircraft go to the toilet.
Easy data mining: "Religious center" is a top-level category. "Religious school" is a type of "School". "Marijuana Dispensary" is a type of "Shop & Service". "Gay Bar" is a type of "Bar".
More evolved: Find location patterns that correlate with known gay or religious people (for instance by cross-referencing data sources).
The same sympathy that is lacking for anti-immigrant activists, is on display in your posts. Can you think of a single legit purpose of anti-immigrant activists? If not, how are you not anything but creating division and misunderstanding?
Edit: I do not understand the downvotes on this. You could help me form a better view on this, by replying or stating what is wrong. I am talking Enterprise Access to Foursquare data.
I also think the "do not trust saliency maps" is too strongly worded. The authors of that paper used adversarial techniques to change the saliency maps. Not just random noise or slight variation, but carefully crafted noise to attack saliency feature importance maps.
> For example, while it would be nice to have a CNN identify a spot on an MRI image as a malignant cancer-causing tumor, these results should not be trusted if they are based on fragile interpretation methods.
Interpretation methods are as fragile as the deep learning model itself, which is susceptible to adversarial images too. If you allow for scenario's with adversarial images, not only should you not trust the interpretation methods, but also the predictions themselves, destroying any pragmatic value left. It is hard to imagine a realistic threat scenario where MRI's are altered by an adversary, _before_ they are fed into a CNN. When such a scenario is realistic, all bets are off. It is much like blaming Google Chrome exposing passwords during an evil maid attack (when someone has access to your computer, they can do all sorts of nasty stuff, it is nearly impossible to guard against this). [3]
[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/s/538111/why-and-how-baidu-...
[3] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/07/google-ch...
EDIT: meta(I liked the article. I do not want to argue it is wrong. It is difficult for me to start a thread without finding the one or two things to nitpick at, or to expand upon a point, but this article was already very resourceful)
Research progress: Better compression measures the progress to general intelligence. http://mattmahoney.net/dc/rationale.html
Future application: Meaningful completion of questions, leading to personalized learning material for students all over the world. If only there was an OpenQuora.
Nobody in industry will abandon NNs over PRs if they are looking to making it easier to handle. I doubt on most industrial problems, that PR even comes close to NNs in performance.
We started out with the guarantee and used it prominently in our marketing copy, so I don't have numbers on conversion rate improvement.
Computer vision can show greater-than-estimated-human-performance, while still failing hilariously unhuman once in a while. People remember the 1 in a 1000 wonky recommendation that made them do a double-take. Recommendation engines work best for the mean and stereotypical person. That way, you can use information of similar profitable people to effectively recommend.
Facebook, for instance, got mined for "suckers". If you are scummy, you want a list of gullible people who click the most stupidest, poorly designed, and shady ads. Ad tech knows where they are and delivers them on a silver platter. Going back 2 decades to serving ads without ML would kill a business. You don't think they thoroughly test a new recommendation engine and see relevant stats go up before they deploy it? You don't think they can serve you more relevant ads when they know you are a 17 year old male vs. a 42 year old woman? Both the data gathering and the algorithms have improved year over year. To say ad tech personalization is terrible, is akin to complaining we don't have AGI.
- what is my equity (potential)?
- is there already a technical platform/process to do my work, or does this need to be build first?
More or less correct. The key difference is that you could not compress a random coin flip sequence (and that a compressed text is meaningless until decompressed to original).
> all minimal programs are by definition Kolmogorov random
Compression provides an upper bound to K. Kolmogorov Randomness itself is not computable. AKA: You can't ever know if you have a minimal program.
> Crystalline forms
It is possible to both have low significance and low information content. Crystalline forms were very significant to Turing though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chemical_Basis_of_Morphoge...
> Shannon information theory provides various measures of so-called "syntactic information", which reflect the amount of statistical correlation between systems. In contrast, the concept of "semantic information" refers to those correlations which carry significance or "meaning" for a given system. Semantic information plays an important role in many fields, including biology, cognitive science, and philosophy, and there has been a long-standing interest in formulating a broadly applicable and formal theory of semantic information. In this paper we introduce such a theory. We define semantic information as the syntactic information that a physical system has about its environment which is causally necessary for the system to maintain its own existence. "Causal necessity" is defined in terms of counter-factual interventions which scramble correlations between the system and its environment, while "maintaining existence" is defined in terms of the system's ability to keep itself in a low entropy state.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08053
Roughly speaking: The amount of computation or energy needed to perfectly reproduce a random source, such as a coin flip, is high, while the significance or meaning, for the average receiver, is low. Natural language text requires less computation to reproduce [1], but, for the average receiver, the significance is higher.
https://www.aclu-wa.org/docs/chinn-v-blankenship-complaint
> If police want to classify you as that, that's fine. It's meaningless.
No it is not meaningless. Police see anarchists and alt-right activists as "harboring ideas that are subversive to state control", meaning, you get on their shit list.
> Arrested for what?
The police stopped the car after it was identified as carrying 3 anarchists (stop & search under false pre-text) close to an anti-war protest. A police officer then arrested the driver for seemingly being under the influence of weed, without any evidence or probably cause, and had him locked up at the police station.
So while you are correct that being an anarchist going to a protest is not a valid reason, if the police wants you off the streets (because they classified you as being shit), they will use another reason (such as: "He looked under the influence of weed" or another popular one: "contempt of cop", which rarely carry any penalties for the cops and kind of act like Joker cards so they can go with a gut feeling over solid proof or cause)
Tweet: "The city council of Sliedrecht proposes to accept 250 refugees in the next 2 years. What a bad plan! #Resist"
Result: Police visits his mother's house asking for him, after which they visit his work address and sit him down: "You sure Tweet a lot. We have received orders to ask you to watch your tone. Your tweets may be construed as incitement."
Especially for opponents to immigration, the Dutch police has a special unit and visits lots of homes, either for Tweets or for maintaining a Facebook page about the subject. Currently the focus is on stopping any Yellow Vest protests from taking root in Holland.
Police: "We want civilians to be aware of the effects a post or Tweet on the internet can have in real life. We monitor Tweets and act if we feel these go 'too far'".
Facebook post on own timeline about a plan to host 1.200 immigrants in a town with 16.600 inhabitants: "Let them fuck off, these assholes. We will all go to the town hall."
Police visits home: "You are inciting an illegal demonstration. We demand you remove the post to avoid further trouble.".
Teacher tweeting about the terrorist attacks against Jews in Belgium: "How can you address this serious topic in class, when you have Muslim students that loudly cheer this on?".
3 Police men knock on door 4 hours later: "We are here ordered by the mayor. They were scared senseless at the town house, but don't you think we have better things to do, no? Do you realize that your tweet can also attract believers that want to do you harm, and can find you, just like we found you? Identify yourself."
Mayor after Streisand Effect: "I did not order anything, and this entire situation sucks. I am sorry and called him to apologize. I am 100% for freedom of speech. Internally, the last word about this drama has not been spoken.".
https://www.bndestem.nl/nieuws/excuses-burgemeester-depla-na...
Other examples with police visits:
> LAST CALL!!!! Everyone who is done with taking in more profiteers, especially because our grandfathers and grandmothers can't receive proper care. [...] Do not let them play you for a fool, but stand up for your country, and come to the market next Monday at 19:00!!!!!!!
> 19th of January the council will discuss accommodating 250 refugees in the next two years. We won't let this happen?!
> Raided by police. My god. Had to hand over our mobile phones. Asked if we had Telegram and if one could search for pictures with us wearing a neon-colored outfit (don't dare say the word).
But that would be digital surveillance and I have no reasonable suspicion to surveil you.
No fun being the target of surveillance without suspicion, because it increases the chance of bad things happening to you. Nearly everyone breaks the law at times: drive 3 km/h too fast to catch the green light, consume illegal drugs, feed the homeless, download from a torrent, create street art, take home a pen from work, hack a website. And the suspicion may come from following "Edward Snowden" on Twitter, or posting on HackerNews about malware, or being the Facebook nephew/schoolmate of a drug dealing suspect, or walking past a smart billboard in a Che Guevara t-shirt.
The Chinese Social Credit system pales in comparison to a society that is too afraid to use its free speech, too afraid to associate with like-minded people, and too afraid to participate in a political movement that is ahead of its time (such as the Civil Rights Movement), because an AI with the power of over 9000 cops is watching your every move outside of the bedroom (if curtains closed. and public internet cut off. and not transmitting "public is public" heat waves).
Right now, the police is tasking commercial companies to map Facebook friend connections into networks and passes this on to social workers, so they can confront particular youth if they start hanging out with non-motivated teenagers who hang on the street all day. All is meant well, but this gives me the creeps. We did not have to deal with this in the 90s, but we also hung out on the street or, god forbid, on a skateboard. Let's keep Privacy alive for a few more years, legal and regulations move slowly. Read up on FBI vs. civil rights movement 50 years ago, and ask yourself, has technology or the Justice system of the US moved faster? "Public content is public" combined with a tremendous rise in AI technology seems like a recipe for a disasterous dystopia. Or is that the plot of Demolition Man?
Yes there is. This data is mined without reasonable suspicion, and shared with all parties, including contractors (commercial companies).
Surveillance without suspicion, storing such data indefinately, is chilling to free speech, opposed to protections against unreasonable searches, makes it more difficult to associate and practice one's religion.
People with no intention to commit crimes are in jail or have a record, because they decided to joke among friends, and had just a bit too big exposure, and just too little context. In the Netherlands you may get a house visit from the police if you tweet critical of the town mayor or tweet about protests (of course, they label it "threats" and "inciting civil unrest")
https://theintercept.com/2018/03/26/facebook-data-ice-immigr...
> Effective law enforcement often requires undercover work, information gathering and surveillance of suspected criminals. Such surveillance should be based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity – and ended when that suspicion is dispelled.
> However, when conducted without suspicion of criminal activity, especially when targeted at unpopular political groups, or when intended to profile religious, ethnic or racial minorities, it violates the right to be free of unwarranted government intrusion and to exercise free speech, association, and practice one’s religion. The harm to those under surveillance without suspicion is made worse when the information collected about them and their activities is shared by local, state and federal law enforcement, military and security agencies and stored in multiple databases, just in case it might ever become useful.
> In addition to chilling speech, surveillance without suspicion actually makes law enforcement less effective. When authorities are swamped with mountains of irrelevant and inaccurate information, their ability to properly analyze data is compromised. Ultimately, these practices make us less safe.
https://www.aclu-wa.org/pages/surveillance-without-suspicion
Right now, your social media might be mined to classify you as an "anarchist", after which you may be pulled over and arrested when you are driving close to an anti-war protest. To me, that does not sound just at all.
For the ridesharing, it depends. Maybe the driver has a route they know well, or has friendly connect. Maybe traffic for you was very bad and chaotic and there was no click.
For ridesharing I played tit-for-tat for a while, until I realized that I don't want to play this game (if my rating drops below a point where less drivers will pick me up, I will switch to Taxi's). For AirBnB: I never leave bad or lukewarm reviews, only good reviews. Getting a host that is actually there for check-in, really acts a host, is getting increasingly rare, so my good reviews are too.